Participation in individual and collective agri-environmental schemes: A synthesis using the Theory of Planned Behaviour

被引:9
|
作者
Sander, Adelaide [1 ]
Ghazoul, Jaboury [1 ]
Finger, Robert [2 ]
Schaub, Sergei [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Ecosyst Management Grp, CHN G 73-1,Univ Str 16, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Swiss Fed Inst Technol, Agr Econ & Policy Grp, Sonneggstr 33, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Agroscope, Managerial Econ, CH-8356 Ettenhausen, Switzerland
关键词
Agri -environmental policy; Theory of planned behaviour; Subjective norms; Trust; Qualitative studies; Behavioural factors; FARMER PARTICIPATION; CLIMATE-CHANGE; CONSERVATION; POLICY; TRUST; BIODIVERSITY; SERVICES; FOOD; EU; IMPLEMENTATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103255
中图分类号
P9 [自然地理学]; K9 [地理];
学科分类号
0705 ; 070501 ;
摘要
Understanding the behavioural factors that influence farmers' intentions to participate in agri-environmental schemes is crucial for delivering sustainability in agricultural landscapes. Drawing on a qualitative synthesis approach, we seek to understand the underlying motivations behind farmers' decisions to engage with individual as well as collective agri-environmental schemes. We systematically map qualitative evidence on behavioural factors in farmers' decision-making using an expanded Theory of Planned Behaviour framework, incorporating trust and legitimacy elements. Our analysis highlights the role of farmer attitudes in individual schemes. Subjective norms influenced by the farming community, and trust in policy-making processes, were crucial factors determining participation in collective schemes. Normative legitimacy, contract complexity and inflexibility, as well as financial and non-financial outcome beliefs, were key barriers to participation in both types of schemes. Based on our findings, we recommend prioritizing interventions that foster institutional and relational trust. Low levels of trust are linked to barriers caused by subjective norms in both collective and individual schemes. Creating opportunities for social interactions and learning can be essential to foster social capital and trust. Policy development should acknowledge the potential relevance of the broader community context in shaping farmer's attitudes, and particularly its relevance in overcoming barriers linked to cognitive legitimacy, to improve both individual and collective participation in agri-environmental schemes.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Trusting the People and the System. The Interrelation Between Interpersonal and Institutional Trust in Collective Action for Agri-Environmental Management
    de Vries, Jasper R.
    van der Zee, Eva
    Beunen, Raoul
    Kat, Rianne
    Feindt, Peter
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2019, 11 (24)
  • [22] Is participation in agri-environmental programs affected by liquidity and solvency?
    Mishra, Ashok K.
    Khanal, Aditya R.
    LAND USE POLICY, 2013, 35 : 163 - 170
  • [23] Environmental evaluation of agri-environment schemes using participatory approaches: Experiences of testing the Agri-Environmental Footprint Index
    Mauchline, Alice L.
    Mortimer, Simon R.
    Park, Julian R.
    Finn, John A.
    Haysom, Karen
    Westbury, Duncan B.
    Purvis, Gordon
    Louwagie, Geertrui
    Northey, Greg
    Primdahl, Jorgen
    Vejre, Henrik
    Kristensen, Lone Soderkvist
    Teilmann, Kasper Vind
    Vesterager, Jens Peter
    Knickel, Karlheinz
    Kasperczyk, Nadia
    Balazs, Katalin
    Podmaniczky, Laszlo
    Vlahos, George
    Christopoulos, Stamatios
    Kroger, Laura
    Aakkula, Jyrki
    Yli-Viikari, Anja
    LAND USE POLICY, 2012, 29 (02) : 317 - 328
  • [24] Designing agri-environmental schemes to cope with uncertainty
    Lapierre, Margaux
    Le Velly, Gwenole
    Bougherara, Douadia
    Preget, Raphaele
    Sauquet, Alexandre
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2023, 203
  • [25] Use of Compliance Rewards in Agri-environmental Schemes
    Yano, Yuki
    Blandford, David
    JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2009, 60 (03) : 530 - 545
  • [26] Types of collective action problems and farmers' willingness to accept agri-environmental schemes in Switzerland
    Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio
    Sagebiel, Julian
    Rommel, Jens
    Olschewski, Roland
    ECOSYSTEM SERVICES, 2021, 50
  • [27] Deciding how to decide on agri-environmental schemes: the political economy of subsidiarity, decentralisation and participation in the European Union
    Beckmann, Volker
    Eggers, Joerg
    Mettepenningen, Evy
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2009, 52 (05) : 689 - 716
  • [28] The role of behavioural factors and opportunity costs in farmers' participation in voluntary agri-environmental schemes: A systematic review
    Schaub, Sergei
    Ghazoul, Jaboury
    Huber, Robert
    Zhang, Wei
    Sander, Adelaide
    Rees, Charles
    Banerjee, Simanti
    Finger, Robert
    JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2023, 74 (03) : 617 - 660
  • [29] Agri-environmental schemes: Adverse selection, information structure and delegation
    Canton, Joan
    De Cara, Stephane
    Jayet, Pierre-Alain
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2009, 68 (07) : 2114 - 2121
  • [30] Designing successful agri-environmental schemes: A mechanistic analysis of a collective scheme for eco-system services in the Netherlands
    Bazzan, Giulia
    Candel, Jeroen
    Daugbjerg, Carsten
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2023, 146 : 123 - 132